An Experimental Study of Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchangers With Continuous Helical Baffles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two shell-and-tube heat exchangers (STHXs) using continuous helical baffles instead of segmental baffles used in conventional STHXs were proposed, designed, and tested in this study. The two proposed STHXs have the same tube bundle but different shell configurations. The flow pattern in the shell side of the heat exchanger with continuous helical baffles was forced to be rotational and helical due to the geometry of the continuous helical baffles, which results in a significant increase in heat transfer coefficient per unit pressure drop in the heat exchanger. Properly designed continuous helical baffles can reduce fouling in the shell side and prevent the flow-induced vibration as well. The performance of the proposed STHXs was studied experimentally in this work. The heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop in the new STHXs were compared with those in the STHX with segmental baffles. The results indicate that the use of continuous helical baffles results in nearly 10% increase in heat transfer coefficient compared with that of conventional segmental baffles for the same shell-side pressure drop. Based on the experimental data, the nondimensional correlations for heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop were developed for the proposed continuous helical baffle heat exchangers with different shell configurations, which might be useful for industrial applications and further study of continuous helical baffle heat exchangers. This paper also presents a simple and feasible method to fabricate continuous helical baffles used for STHXs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".